Corporal Punishment as a Stressor Among Youth

7/30/2019 Corporal Punishment as a Stressor Among Youth

1/13

Corporal Punishment as a Stressor among Youth

Author(s): Heather A. Turner and David FinkelhorSource: Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Feb., 1996), pp. 155-166Published by: National Council on Family RelationsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/353384

Accessed: 23/01/2010 19:17

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ncfr.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

National Council on Family Relations is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Journal of Marriage and Family.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/stable/353384?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ncfrhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ncfrhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/353384?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/13

HEATHER. TURNERNDDAVIDFINKELHORUniversityof New Hampshire

CorporalPunishmentas a StressorAmong Youth

This article addresses the impact of corporal pun-ishment by parents on the psychological well-being of youth. Thepresent research used the Na-tional Youth Victimization Prevention Study(NYVPS), a nationally representative sample of1,042 boys and 958 girls, ages 10-16. Based on astress-process framework, we examine: (a) the ef-fects of frequency of corporal punishment experi-enced by youth ages 10-16 on psychological dis-tress and clinically relevant depression and (b)the moderating influence of parental support onthe associations between corporal punishmentand psychological outcomes. Controlling for so-ciodemographic factors and physical abuse, ourfindings indicate a positive association betweenthe frequency of corporal punishment and bothpsychological distress and depression. Althoughdistress is greatest at higher frequencies of pun-ishment, the association is also present at lowand moderate levels of corporal punishment. Aninteraction between corporal punishment andparental support was also evident, showing thatthe impact of frequent punishment relative to nocorporal punishment was greater in the context ofhigh parental support.Corporal punishment or physical punishmentrefers o "theuse of physical orce withthe inten-Department of Sociology, University of New Hampshire, Hor-ton SSC, Durham, NH 03824.Key Words: corporal punishment, depression, parental sup-port, psychological distress, stress, youth.

tion of causing a child pain, but not injury,forpurposes of correction or control of the child'sbehavior"(Straus & Donnelly, 1993, p. 420). Thecorporalpunishmentof childrenby parents s anormativeform of discipline in our society. Infact, spankingandslappingchildrenarenot onlyconsideredacceptable,but generallybelieved tobe highly effective and quite necessary. Straus(1991) found that 84% of a nationalsampleofadults agreed that a "good, hard spanking issometimesnecessary."Parentswho refuseto usecorporalpunishmenton childrenare viewed astoo lenient andineffective-in essence, "poor"parents (Carson, 1986).Consistent with the these norms, almost allparents use corporal punishment on their toddlers(Straus, 1991, 1994). While the prevalence of cor-poral punishmentdeclines with the age of thechild,it still remainshigh even into adolescence.Recently,StrausandDonnelly(1993) foundthatalmost half of the children n early adolescenceexperience corporal punishment by a parent.Moreover, adolescents report being physicallypunishedat a median requencyof fourtimesperyear.StrausandDonnellysuggest hat his is like-ly a lowerboundestimate,since it only includespunishmentromoneparent.

CORPORALUNISHMENTSACHILDHOODTRESSORA varietyof negativehealth andbehavioralout-comes suggeststhat acts involvingphysicalpun-ishmentarestressful orchildren.The mostwell-

Journalof Marriageand the Family 58 (February 1996): 155-166 155


3/13

Journal of Marriage and the Familyknown outcome of corporal punishment is that itincreases violent behavior by the punished child(Larzelere, 1986; Lefkowitz, Eron, Walder, &Huesmann, 1977; Maurer, 1974; Parke & Slaby,1983; Straus, 1991). For example, Straus (1991)found that children who received "ordinary"cor-poral punishment were 3 times more likely to as-sault siblings than those who were never physi-cally punished. Similarly, Larzelere (1986) re-ported a linear relationship, across several agegroups of children, between frequency of corporalpunishment and aggressive acts.Although most research on the effects of physi-cal punishment has focused on child aggression,othernegative effects on behavior and health havebeen reported also. For example, several studiesrelated physical punishment to depression in chil-dren (Holmes & Robins, 1988; Maurer, 1974;Straus, 1994). Bryan and Freed (1982) found thatcollege students who were physically punished inchildhood manifested several long-term effects,including having fewer friends and a greater fre-quency of negative social interactions, as well aselevated levels of depression and anxiety. Similar-ly, Straus and Kaufman-Kantor(1994) found thatcorporal punishment experienced in teenage yearswas positively associated with drinking problems,depressive symptoms, andthoughtsof suicide.Past studies concerning the effects of generalparenting styles or strategies on child develop-ment also point to corporal punishment as a po-tential childhood stressor. For example, parentingstyles defined as "authoritarian," "power as-sertive," "coersive," or "harsh"(all of which in-clude an emphasis on physical discipline) haverepeatedly been related to aggression in children(Anthony, 1970; Feshbach & Feshbach, 1972;Maccoby & Martin, 1983; Rothbaum & Weisz,1994; Weiss, Dodge, Bates, & Pettit, 1992). Au-thoritarian-type parenting also has been associat-ed with children having less social competencewith their peers, developing an external ratherthan an internal moral orientation, and showingless motivation for intellectual achievement rela-tive to children of nonauthoritarianparents (Hoff-man, 1970; Maccoby & Martin, 1983).Bryan and Freed (1982) found that college stu-dents who reported receiving high levels of cor-poral punishment as children or adolescents weremore likely than those who experienced less cor-poral punishment to describe their grades as"below average,"even though there was no actualdifference in their grades. The investigators at-tributed this to the damaging effect of corporal

punishment on self-concept. In fact, a number ofscholars have suggested that authoritarian disci-pline, which emphasizes the use of physical pun-ishment, contributes to negative self-judgments(self-esteem), as well as lower perceived personalcontrol (mastery) over life outcomes (Belsky,Learner, & Spanier, 1984; Bongiovanni, 1979;Maccoby & Martin, 1983; Patterson, 1982). AsPearlin (1989) argued, these two aspects of self-concept, self-esteem and mastery, can influencethe extent to which stress becomes translatedintopsychological distress.It is important to acknowledge the possibilitythat children with behavioral and emotional diffi-culties or both may be more likely to elicit physi-cal punishment than children without such prob-lems. In other words, it is possible that the causaldirection of a cross-sectional association betweenfrequency of corporal punishment and negativebehavioral and psychological problems runs fromthe child to corporal punishment. While this inter-pretation is plausible, there is sufficient theoreti-cal and empirical justification for assuming that atleast some important part of this association isdue to the causal impact of corporal punishment.In fact, a recent longitudinal study demonstratingthe influence of corporal punishment on subse-quent increases in antisocial behavior (Sugarman,Straus, & Giles-Sims, 1994), strongly supportsthe idea that corporal punishment is a causal fac-tor for negative outcomes. Since depressed moodseems less likely to elicit punishment than antiso-cial behavior and, therefore, is even less suscepti-ble to the alternative interpretation,we are confi-dent that a significant part of an association be-tween corporal punishment and child distress isdue to the causal impact of corporal punishmenton children's well-being.

Research on the consequences of corporalpunishment runs the risk of confounding corporalpunishment with physical abuse. Evidence thatphysical abuse represents a serious childhoodtrauma is well established (see National ResearchCouncil, 1993), and much of the debate concern-ing the effects of corporal punishment centers onwhether this form of punishment has negative ef-fects that are independent of abusive family con-texts. While corporal punishment is common innonabusive families, parents who are physicallyabusive also tend to use large amounts of corporalpunishment (Straus, 1994). Unfortunately, muchof the research on corporal punishment has notdisentangled its effects from those of physicalabuse.

156


4/13

Corporal Punishment as a Stressor

A STRESS-PROCESS FRAMEWORKGiven evidence concerning the potential negativeeffects of corporal punishment on the well-beingof children, the stress-process framework mayrepresenta particularlyuseful approachfor study-ing these issues. The stress-process model hasbeen a widely used and effective conceptualframework for examining the link between the so-cial environment and individual consequences.Stress research on both adults and children hasclearly documented the negative impact of stress-ful events and circumstances on the physical andpsychological health of individuals. However,while there have been studies that consider thenegative effects of corporal punishment, the so-cial stress literature generally has not recognizedthe experience of corporal punishment as a child-hood stressor. And although important researchon the corporal punishment of children can befound in parenting and child development litera-tures, most of this research has been conducted inthe context of trying to understand the develop-ment of aggressive behavior in children. Placingcorporal punishment within a stress model mayallow for better theoretical development of theprocesses by which corporal punishment affectsmental health.For example, research on sources of stress hasshown that life events perceived as negative, un-expected, or uncontrollable have the most poten-tial to elicit negative responses (Thoits, 1983). Tothe extent that corporal punishment has thesequalities, it may more likely result in psychologi-cal distress. Chronic strain, another importantsource of stress (Pearlin, Leiberman, Menaghan,& Mullan, 1981), is also relevant to corporal pun-ishment and its effects. Unlike life events, chronicstrains do not have a discrete onset and ending,but represent more enduring conditions in peo-ple's lives. Corporalpunishment that is very fre-quent may become an ongoing hardship for chil-dren. Some investigators believe that these morechronic conditions have the greatest potential forproducing negative effects (Pearlin, 1989).Part of the utility of the stress-process ap-proach is its consideration of the social and per-sonal contexts in which a stressor occurs. Peoplevary considerably in the extent to which they areaffected by potential stressors. At least partof thisdifference in response to stressors is due to varia-tions in stress moderators. That is, individualsmay possess certain social or personal resourcesthat buffer the negative effects of stress, while

other factors may function to exacerbate its im-pact. Turner (in press) outlines a number of con-texts or conditions under which corporal punish-ment is administered that may influence its out-come. One potential moderating influence is thedegree to which children receive social supportfrom their parents. Children who experience theirparents as nurturant and supportive may be lessadversely affected by corporal punishment.Parental support may increase the child's confi-dence, self-esteem, and ability to cope withstressful circumstances, making corporal punish-ment less distressing. Since social supportbuffersthe negative effects of stress in numerous othercontexts (see Cohen & Syme, 1985), there is rea-son to expect that support would also reduce theharmful impact of this childhood stressor.While, given past research, we might expectparental support to reduce the negative impact ofcorporal punishment, an alternative hypothesis isworth considering. Since, in the present context,both the stress and the support experienced by thechild arise from the same source (the parent), adifferent set of processes may take place. Ratherthan serve as a buffer, high parental supportmaycreate a context in which the child experiences in-cidents of physical punishment as inconsistent,confusing, and especially distressing. Childrenwith high parental support may have greateremo-tional attachments to their parents, and, as a re-sult, may be more negatively affected when par-ents are the sources of stress. If this were the case,high parental support might function to exacer-bate, rather than reduce, the negative effects ofcorporal punishment.In the context of this stress-process frame-work, the objectives of the present study are to:(a) examine the impact of corporal punishment(independent of physical abuse) on psychologicaldistress and depression among youth aged 10-16and (b) assess the role of perceived parental sup-port as a contextual factor that may affect theseassociations.

METHODS

Sample and ProcedureThe present study uses data from the NationalYouth Victimization Prevention Study (NYVPS),conducted in 1992. The NYVPS, designed to ad-dress child victimization and prevention of vic-timization, consists of a nationally representativesample of 1,042 boys and 958 girls between the

157


5/13

Journal of Marriage and the Family

ages of 10 and 16 and theirparentsor guardians.The samplewas randomlyselected within geo-graphical egions,withsampleallocationspropor-tionalto the populationdistribution.Householdswerecontacted y phone hrough andomdigitdi-aling and screenedfor the presence of eligiblechildren. nterviewersirstspokewith a parentorguardian n each household,asking him or herquestionsconcerning he prevention f child vic-timization and explaining the purpose of thestudy.Thenparental onsentto interview he se-lected child was obtained.Aftermakingcontactwith the child, interviewersagainexplainedtheobjectives of the study, obtained consent, andproceededwith a telephone nterview. nterviewsranged rom30 minutes o 1hour n length.Theparticipationatewas 88%for theparentsor guardians ontacted.Eighty-twopercentof theselected children with consenting parents orguardians greedto participate.We believe tele-phone nterviewings a relativelyeffective meansof surveyingyoung people.Childrenof this agegenerallyspendconsiderable ime talkingon thetelephonewithfriends,often aboutpersonal ub-jects. Moreover, elephone nterviewsgive chil-dren a great deal of control over a potentiallythreateningituation.By simplyhangingup, theycan terminatethe interview, something muchmoredifficult n aface-to-face ncounter.We be-lieve the participation ate is quite respectable,given the sensitivetopic, the lengthof the inter-view,and herequired onsentof two individuals.The final samplematched ensusstatistics orthe U.S. populationn thisage group.Thesamplewas 10%Black,7%Hispanic,3%otherraces, n-cluding Asian and Native American. Fourteenpercentof thesamplecame fromfamilieswithin-comes of less than$20,000a year.Fifteenpercentwere living with a single parent,another 13%with a parentandstep-parent,nd 3%with a non-parentalguardian.Givenequal probability f se-lectioninto the samplewith no systematicover-sampling, the data were analyzed withoutweights.

MeasuresCorporal punishment. A number of questionsaboutdisciplinaryactionby parentswere asked.Withinthis context, respondents ndicatedhowoftenthey were spanked, lapped,or hit by par-ents orguardianswithin hepastyear.Thisopera-tionalization f corporalpunishments similar othat used in other studies (Straus& Donnelly,

1993).Eventhough t is legal to hit a childwithan object(a belt, paddle,or stick) as long as noserious injuryresults,we excludedhittingwithobjectsfrom our measure.By excludingcorporalpunishmentwith objects,we createda conserva-tive measureof corporalpunishmenthatwe be-lieve reduces the chance of includingbehaviorsconsideredabusive.Thus,we think our measurerepresentswhat most Americanswould view as"normal"hysicalpunishment.The original measureranges from 0 (neverspanked, lapped,or hit withinthepastyear)to 5(spanked, lapped,orhitmorethanonce a week).Much of the publicpolicy debate,however,con-cerns whethermoderate or infrequentcorporalpunishment s helpful or hurtful.Therefore,wewantedto determine f any physicalpunishmentor low levels of physical punishmentare detri-mental,or whether t is only whencorporalpun-ishment s relatively requent hatit has negativeeffects on the well-being of youth. In defininglevels of corporalpunishment,we reasoned hatone or two incidentsof corporalpunishment eryear ikely represent are, ast resorteffortsat dis-cipline, whereasfrequentpunishmentof one ormore timesa month s morelikely to reflect cor-poralpunishment s a preferredtrategyof disci-pline.Moderateevels of punishmentallbetweenthese low andfrequentevels. Therefore,we con-structed ourdummyvariables:no physical pun-ishment n thepastyear(1 = none,0 = other), owphysicalpunishment1 = once or twice in the lastyear,0 = other),moderate 1 = 3-11 times in thelastyear,0 = other),andfrequent 1 = 1 or moretimes a month,0 = other).Psychological distress. A measure of psychologi-cal distressbased on themeanscoreof five itemswas constructed. Respondents indicated howoften in the past monththey "were sad," "feltalone,""feltbad aboutschool,""feltbad abouttheir ooks,""felttheyweredoingthings wrong"on a 4-pointscale ranging romnever (0) to al-ways (3), with a mean score of .82 (SD = .44).Thereliability oefficient or thisscale is .60. Al-though his alphacoefficient s ratherow, a fac-toranalysisrevealsonlyone factor,andeachitemis similarlyrelatedto the underlyingconstruct.Since low reliabilitygenerallyattenuates ssocia-tions, we anticipate hat the strengthof relation-ships found between distress and the predictorvariableswill represent ower boundestimates.Analyses involvingthis variableshouldbe con-sidered argelyexploratory.

158


6/13


Depression.Using a modifiedversionof the Di-agnostic InterviewSchedule (DIS; see Robins,Helzer,Crougham,Williams,& Spitzer,1981),adichotomous measure of depression was con-structed.FollowingDSM-IIIguidelines,childrenwho had a periodof 2 weeksorlongerwhentheyfelt unhappy r lost interest n thingsthey usuallyliked to do andwho experienced5 out of the 11depression-congruentymptomsduring his peri-od were classified as depressed. We departedfrom the DIS format by asking respondentswhether hey had "ever" xperienced he screen-ing events,rather han whether hey had experi-enced them "in the past 6 months."However,only youthwhomet the DIScriteria ndindicatedon an additionalscreenerthatthey had felt sadmanytimesor all thetimein thepast monthwereincludedn thedepressed ategory.Therefore,heyouth in our samplewho were classified as de-pressedhadexperienced MajorDepressiveSyn-dromeat somepoint n their ives, and t couldbeassumedthatthey were experiencing ignificantnegativeaffect in the monthpreceding he inter-view.On the basis of this procedure, totalof 107youth,5.4%of thetotalsample,wereclassifiedasdepressed.Thispercentages withintherangeofprevalence stimatesof currentdepressionor de-pressionexperiencedwithin he last 6 monthsde-rived from other child and adolescent samples(see Fleming&Offord,1990).Parentalsupport.Respondents'mean scores onfive itemsreflecting he supportive ualityof therespondents' elationshipswith theirparent(s)orguardian(s)were used to constructa measureofparental upport.Respondentsansweredon a 5-pointscale ranging romnever(0) to always(4)questionssuch as: "Do they trustyou?","Ifyouwere in troublewould you talk to them?","Doyou and your parentshave fun together?"Thisyieldeda meanof 3.7 (SD= .65).Thealphacoef-ficientfor thisscale is .67.Sociodemographics. Since both corporal punish-ment and psychological outcomes are likely tovary by childandfamilybackgroundharacteris-tics, threesociodemographicactorswere consid-ered. Specifically,ordinary east squares(OLS)and logistic regression analyses included age,gender,andparent's ncome as controlvariables.Age was coded in years,from 10 to 16. Genderwas dummycoded (1 = male, 2 = female).Par-

ent'syearly ncome was codedinto themidpointsof 10 categories, ranging from $2,500 to$125,000.Physicalabuse. Past studies have foundcorrela-tions between hefrequency f "normative"hys-ical punishmentand the occurrenceof physicalabuse (Straus,1994). For this reason,a dummyvariablendicatingwhether hechild had ever ex-perienceda completedor attempted ncidentofsevere physical assaultby a parentor guardianwas includedas a controlvariable 0 = no physi-cal assaultever, 1= at least one incident).Specif-ically, respondents eceived a score of 1 if theyansweredpositivelyto one or bothof the follow-ing: (a) "Has[a parentor guardian] ver pushedyou around,hit you, or tried to beatyou up?"or(b) "Has[a parentor guardian] ottenso madorout of controlyou thought heywerereallygoingto hurtyou badly?"Respondentswho indicatedthatduringan episodeof physicalpunishment yparents heywere "hitso hard heybled or hadtogo to thehospital"were alsogivena score of 1 onphysicalabuse.

RESULTSThe sampleis relativelyevenly dividedbetweenmales and females (52.1%male,47.9%female).Theagedistributionf thesample s also relative-ly uniform, with each of the 10-16-year-oldgroupsrepresenting etween11.3%and16.3%ofthe sample. The mean parental income was$43,544 peryear (SD = $26,770). Almost5%oftherespondents adexperienced ometypeof se-vere physicalassaultby a parentor guardianatsomepoint n their ives.Approximately30% of the sample of youthhad been physically punished within the pastyear.Almost17%experienced "low" requencyof corporalpunishmentonceor twice in thepastyear).Five andone-halfpercent eported moder-ate" frequenciesof physical punishment(3-11times in the past year),and almost7%reportedfrequentcorporalpunishmentof at least once amonth.In order to examine the associationbetweenpsychologicaldistress and corporalpunishment,severalOLSregressionanalyseswereperformed.These analysesare presented n Table 1. In thefirstequation,distress s regressedon the set ofthreedummyvariablesfor corporalpunishment(low,moderate, ndfrequent).Thus, n these(andsubsequent)analyses, respondentswho experi-

159


7/13

Journal of Marriage and the Familyenced no corporal punishment represent the com-parison group. The smaller sample size seen inthese analyses is due to missing values, primarilyon the income variable. Results indicate that, al-though the overall variance explained by corporalpunishment is relatively small, all levels of corpo-ral punishment are significantly related to psycho-logical distress. Moreover, these associations re-main statistically significant when the sociodemo-graphic control variables (sex, age, and parentalincome) are added to the equation.Since other studies (e.g., Straus, 1994) havefound a correlation between the frequency of cor-poral punishment and severe forms of physicalchild abuse, we believed it was important to in-clude a measure of physical abuse as a control.That is, since we are interested in the potentialimpact of "normative" physical punishment onpsychological outcomes, we wanted to considerits effect, net of physical abuse. Equation 3 in-cludes a measure of the occurrence of physicalabuse as a control variable. Although physicalabuse is significantly related to distress, it doesnot account for the effect of corporal punishment.The corporal punishment coefficients remain sta-tistically significant and are not appreciably re-duced when the effects of abuse are controlled.While a high frequency of corporal punishment(more than one incident a month) had the greatest

effect on distress (b = .286, f3= .163, p < .001),the less frequently punished groups were also sig-nificantly affected. In fact, respondents who hadexperienced corporal punishment only once ortwice in the past year had significantly higher dis-tress scores than those who were never physicallypunished (b = .125, f = .106, p < .001). Themoderate group (3-10 times a year) fell betweenthe low and severe groups (b = .257, P = .133, p


8/13

Corporal Punishment as a StressorTABLE2. PSYCHOLOGICALISTRESS EGRESSED N CORPORALUNISHMENT,ONTROL ARIABLES,PARENTALUPPORTEQUATION), ANDSUPPORT/CORPORALUNISHMENTNTERACTIONEQUATION)

Equation1 Equation2Regression RegressionCoefficient CoefficientVariables SE SE

CorporalpunishmentLow .073** .061 .072** .061(.026) (.026)Moderate .183*** .095 .168*** .087(.042) (.043)Frequent .196*** .111 .233** .132(.039) (.040)

Sex .166*** .189 .168*** .191(.019) (.019)

Age .016** .070 .016** .070(.005) (.005)Parent's ncome -.000 -.019 -.000 -.020(.000) (.000)Any physicalabuse .127** .061 .135** .066(.045) (.045)Parental upport -.222** -.330 -.224*** -.333(.015) (.016)Interactions

Low x support .027 .015(.038)Moderatex support -.045 -.020(.056)Frequentx support .193*** .081(.054)

R2 .208 .215N= 1,704

**p


9/13

Journal of Marriage and the FamilyFIGURE 1. ADJUSTED MEAN DISTRESS SCORES FOR LOW AND HIGH PARENTAL SUPPORT

AMONG Low, MODERATE, AND SEVERE CORPORALPUNISHMENTGROUPS1.2

1.1

FrequentCorporalPunishment

X ModerateCorporalPunishmentLowCorporalPunishment

No CorporalPunishment

Low Parental SupportNote: Scores areadjusted or age, sex, parental ncome, andphysical abuse.

poral punishmentgroups,we see a decrease indistresswhenparental upports high.However,the magnitudeof this decrease is considerablysmaller among the frequently punished group.Viewed anotherway, the difference in distressscores between frequentlypunished youth andthose who were never physically punished ismuch greater among those who report highparental upport.Furtherexamination of the frequently pun-ished groupshows thatthe sex andage distribu-tion of respondents eportinghigh parental up-port s significantlydifferent romthosereportinglow support analysesnot shown). Specifically,youthwhoreportbotha highfrequencyof physi-cal punishmentand high parental supportaremore likely to be male and are younger thanyouth who experiencefrequentpunishmentbutperceive low support.In fact, 57% of those re-portingboth high punishmentand high support

areunder12yearsold, andnoneis 15 or 16yearsold.Whilethe analysespresentedhus farfocus ontherelationship etweencorporalpunishment nda more general measure of distress, we alsowishedto determinehepotentialmpactof phys-ical punishmenton depression.For these analy-ses, we performeda multivariateogistic regres-sion usingthe dichotomousmeasureof clinicallyrelevantdepressiondescribedearlier as the out-come variable.Oddsratios,reported n Table3,werecalculatedby exponentiatinghe logisticco-efficients.Theseodds ratioscanbe interpretedsthe relative odds of depressionamong respon-dentswhodifferby one unit on thepredictor ari-able. For example,resultsindicatethat the oddsof depressionare 3.19 times higherfor femalesrelative to males, independent f the othervari-ables.

()15 11

0I.0 0.90)0-X , 0.80.OL

0.6High Parental Support

162


10/13

Corporal Punishment as a StressorTABLE3. LOGISTIC EGRESSIONPREDICTINGOUTHDEPRESSION

OddsRatios(95%ConfidenceIntervals)Sex 3.19*** (2.70-3.68)Age 1.26*** (1.13-1.39)Parentalncome .95 (0.84-1.06)Physicalabuse 2.12* (1.44-2.80)CorporalpunishmentLow 1.17 (0.57-1.77)Moderate 1.56 (0.72-2.40)Frequent 2.95** (2.22-3.68)Parental upport .31*** (0.00-0.64)N= 1,704

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

With respect to corporal punishment, only thefrequently punished group had a greater odds ofdepression relative to those who were not physi-cally punished. Specifically, the odds for depres-sion were almost 3 times higher for those experi-encing frequent corporal punishment. Both thelow and moderate corporal punishment groupswere not significantly different on odds of depres-sion from the group experiencing no corporalpunishment. Results also indicate that increases inparental support substantially reduced the odds ofdepression. Statistical interactions betweenparental supportand the dummy variables for cor-poral punishment were tested, but were not statis-tically significant.

SUMMARYNDDISCUSSIONThe present research supports the conclusion thatcorporal punishment represents a potential sourceof stress among youth. Of central importance arethe findings that corporal punishment significant-ly contributes to both psychological distress anddepression. Although physical abuse by a parentalso has negative psychological consequences forthe child, physical punishment within the pastyear is related to distress and depression, indepen-dent of abuse. Especially significant are the find-ings concerning the impact of different frequen-cies of corporalpunishment on psychological dis-tress. Although respondents in the most severepunishment category are the most affected, evenlow levels of physical punishment (once or twicea year) appearto contributeto feelings of distress.Findings also indicate that corporal punishment isrelated to a measure of clinically relevant depres-sion, although only for respondents experiencinga high frequency of physical punishment. Thus,while any physical punishment appearsto be dis-

tressing, only very frequent physical punishment(one or more times a month) appears to contributeto major depression. Consistent with past re-search, females and older youth (adolescents) ex-perience greater psychological distress andgreater odds of depression than do males andyounger youth (pre-adolescents).The association between corporal punishmentand psychological distress is partly conditionalupon how supportive the parents were perceivedto be. Among respondents who experienced ahigh frequency of physical punishment, lowparental supportreduced, rather than accentuated,the negative impact of physical punishment ondistress. That is, parental support in this contextdid not buffer the stress of frequent corporal pun-ishment. Instead, the magnitude of the positiveassociation between frequentphysical punishmentand distress was stronger among those reportinghigh parental support.While it is not entirely clear why these findingsemerged, a number of explanations seem plausi-ble. For example, it is possible that parents whoarehighly supportiveand who frequently adminis-ter corporal punishment tend to be more inconsis-tent and arbitrary n their parentingpractices. Thetendency for parents to be unpredictable-some-times nurturant, sometimes physically aggres-sive-may be particularlydistressing. Indeed, thechild development literature emphasizes the im-portance of consistency in parenting for healthydevelopment. Moreover, stress research has foundthat life events perceived as unexpected are morelikely to be stressful and result in negative out-comes than events that are anticipated.To the ex-tent that corporal punishment by highly supportiveparents more often has this unexpected quality,youth who experience both high support and fre-quent physical punishment may be at risk for in-creased psychological distress.An alternative explanation of why parentalsupportmay be less beneficial for respondents ex-periencing frequent corporalpunishment concernsdifferences in respondents' attributions abouttheir parents' behavior. Perceiving parents as lesssupportive in the context of being frequentlyspanked, slapped, or hit may have a self-preserv-ing function by allowing children to attributetheirparents' "violent" responses to their being"mean" or "unfair." On the other hand, childrenwho perceive parents as nurturant, un, and trust-ing at the same time that they are frequently hitby them may attributethe physical punishment totheir own inadequacies or inabilities. Children

163


11/13

Journal of Marriage and the Familywith highly supportive parents may also be moreemotionally attached and likely to identify withtheir parents.Greater identification may make theparent's "violent" responses more hurtful than ifthe child was more detached from the parent.These latterinterpretationsare consistent with thefact that most youth who reportboth severe pun-ishment and high parental support are under 12years old, rather than teenagers. Younger youthare probably more attached to their parents andless able to evaluate parents negatively, evenwhen punished frequently, because they have notyet startedidentifying with peers and disengagingfrom parents to the same extent as older youth.These findings, of course, do not imply thatchildren or adolescents are better off with lesssupportive parents. On the contrary, of all vari-ables considered, parental support proved themost powerful factor in reducing the level of dis-tress and lowering the odds of depression amongyouth. The findings do suggest, however, thatusing physical punishment is not beneficial to thewell-being of children or adolescents even in thecontext of a supportive parent-child relationship.In fact, this "loving" context may affect themeaning that children attach to the punishment,such that they are more likely to attribute it totheir own failures and deficiencies, or experiencethe discipline as arbitraryand unexpected. Indeed,believing that "they spank me often because theylove me" may be more distressing than believingthat "they spank me often because we don't getalong."The findings of the present study are consis-tent with other research linking parenting behav-ior with child and adolescent outcomes. For ex-ample, Patterson(1982) describes how "inept dis-cipline," which includes the use of physical formsof punishment, can set in motion a long chain ofnegative outcomes. Harsh discipline leads to anti-social behavior, which contributes to academicfailure and social rejection. These conditions re-duce self-esteem and create depressed mood,which, in turn, increase the likelihood of delin-quency in adolescence and ultimately contributeto problems in marriage and work as adults. Pat-terson views parental discipline as the malleabledeterminant in this process. Indeed, his findingsshow that training parents to use nonphysicalforms of punishment reduces the likelihood ofnegative outcomes. More recently, Ge, Conger,Lorenz, and Simons (1994) found that "harsh,hostile, and inconsistent parenting" by eithermothers or fathers was significantly related to de-

pressive symptoms in adolescent boys and girls.They showed that such parenting practices canrepresent important mediating factors betweenstressful life events experienced by parents andadolescent depression.The present study builds on this research byexamining how more "normative" forms of disci-pline influence the psychological outcomes ofyouth. Although these past studies show that"inept," "inconsistent," or "harsh"parenting hasnegative outcomes, the current research suggeststhat even what most Americans consider "reason-able" levels of physical punishment can have neg-ative effects on their children. While it may takevery frequent physical punishment to affect clini-cal levels of depression, infrequent or moderatespanking of children can contribute to more gen-eral psychological distress.A number of limitations of this researchshould be acknowledged. First, the measure ofpsychological distress used in this study has a rel-atively low internalreliability of .60. Although allthe individual items load on only one factor, andalthough all are similarly relatedto the underlyingconstruct, they are not highly consistent with oneanother. Since low reliability generally attenuatesassociations, the relationships found between dis-tress and the predictor variables probably repre-sent conservative estimates. This problem mayalso apply to the measure of parental support,since it too has only a moderate reliability of .67.Another potential limitation is associated withthe use of cross-sectional data. In these analyses,we are unable to actually establish the causal di-rection of the associations between corporal pun-ishment and distress/depression. It is possible thatdistressed or depressed youth cause parents toadopt disciplinary styles that favor physical pun-ishment. Moreover, distressed youth may be morelikely to exhibit behavioral problems that, in turn,elicit physical punishment. Current states of dis-tress or depression can also directly alter an indi-vidual's perceptions and can affect the accuracyof recall. Thus, as a result of their affective state,distressed or depressed youth may be more likelyto perceive their parents in a negative light andoverestimate the number of times they were phys-ically punished. The fact that we were forced torely on the child as a single source of information,including information about the parent's behav-ior, increases the chances of bias.We were not able to measure a number of rele-vant and potentially important factors that mighthave helped to rule out alternative explanations or

164


12/13


better specify the processes involved. For exam-ple, measures of possible behavioral problems,such as child aggression, as well as measures ofthe parents' psychological dispositions couldhave provided additional insight. Finally, it is im-portant to remember that this study focuses onyouth between the ages of 10 andl6. The findingsmay not be generalizable to younger children.In conclusion, this research adds to the grow-ing body of literatureshowing the importance offamily context in child and adolescent develop-ment. Disciplinary practices, even those that areviewed as ordinary and acceptable, may affectwell-being in important ways. Moreover, thecharacter of interpersonal relations within thefamily provides the context in which children in-terpretand respond to the actions of their parents.The stress-process model provides a useful frame-work for studying corporal punishment by takinginto account both the qualities of the stressor andthe social and personal contexts that may influ-ence its impact. Further research on stress pro-cesses involving corporal punishment and its im-pact on children's development and well-being isclearly warranted.

NOTEThe authors would like to acknowledge the Boy Scoutsof America for their support of this project. Survey re-search reported here was carried out by Schulman,Ronca and Bucuvalis, Inc.

REFERENCESAnthony, E. J.(1970). The behavior disorders of chil-dren. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.), Carmichael's manual ofchild psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 667-764). New York:Wiley.Belsky, J., Learner, R. M., & Spanier, G. B. (1984). 7hechild in thefamily. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Bongiovanni, A. F. (1979). An analysis of research onpunishmentand its relationto the use of corporalpunishmentn the schools. In I. A. Hyman& J. H.Wise (Eds.), Corporal punishment in American edu-cation: Readings in history, practice, and alternatives(pp.351-372).Philadelphia:empleUniversityPress.Bryan,J. W., & Freed,F. W. (1982).Corporal unish-ment:Normativedata andsociologicalandpsycho-logicalcorrelatesn acommunityollege population.Journal of Youthand Adolescence, 11, 77-87.Carson, B. (1986). Parents who don't spank: Deviationin the legitimization of physical force. Unpublisheddoctoraldissertation,Universityof New Hampshire,

Durham.Cohen, S., & Syme, L. (1985). Social support andhealth. New York: Academic Press.Feshbach, N. D., & Feshbach, S. (1972). Children's ag-gression. In W. W. Hartup (Ed.), The young child:

Review of research (Vol. 2, pp. 284-302). Washing-ton, DC: National Association for the Education ofYoung Children.Fleming, J. E., & Offord, D. R. (1990). Epidemiology ofchildhood depressive disorders: A critical review.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Ado-lescent Psychiatry, 29, 271-580.Ge, X., Conger, R. D., Lorenz, F. O., & Simons, R. L.(1994). Parents' stressful life events and adolescentdepressed mood. Journal of Health and Social Behav-ior, 35, 28-44.Hoffman, M. L. (1970). Moral Development. In P. H.Mussen (Ed.), Carmichael's manual of child psychol-ogy (Vol. 2, pp. 261-360). New York: Wiley.Holmes, S. J., & Robins, L. N. (1988). The role ofparental disciplinary practices in the development ofdepression and alcoholism. Psychiatry, 51, 24-35.Larzelere, R. E. (1986). Moderate spanking: Model ordeterrent of children's aggressive behavior in thefamily? Journal of Family Violence, 1, 27-36.Lefkowitz, M., Eron, L., Walder, L., & Huesmann, L.(1977). Growing up to be violent: A longitudinalstudy of the development of aggression. New York:Pergamon.Maccoby,E., & Martin,J. (1983). Socializationn thecontext of the family: Parent-child interaction. InE. M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of child psychol-ogy: Vol. 4. Socialization, personality and social de-velopment (pp. 1-101). New York:Wiley.Maurer,A. (1974). Corporalpunishment.American Psy-chologist, 29, 614-626.National Research Council. (1993). Understandingchildabuse and neglect. Washington, DC: National Acade-myPress.Parke, R., & Slaby, R. (1983). The development of ag-gression.In E. M. HetheringtonEd.),Handbook fchild psychology: Vol. 4. Socialization, personalityand social development (pp. 547-642). New York:Wiley.Patterson, G. R. (1982). A social learning approach tofamily intervention: III. Coercivefamily process. Eu-gene,OR:Castalia.Pearlin, L. I. (1989). The sociological study of stress.Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 30, 241-256.Pearlin,L. I., Lieberman,M. A., Menaghan,E. G., &Mullan, J. T. (1981). The stress process. Journal ofHealth and Social Behavior, 22, 337-356.Robins, J. N., Helzer, J. E., Crougham, R., Williams,J. B. W., & Spitzer,R. L. (1981).NIMHdiagnosticinterview schedule: Version III. Rockville, MD: Na-tional Institute of Mental Health.Rothbaum, F., & Weisz, J. R. (1994). Parentalcaregiv-ing and child externalizing behavior in nonclinicalsamples: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin,116,55-74.Straus, M. A. (1991). Discipline and deviance: Physicalpunishment of children and violence and other crimesin adulthood. Social Problems, 38, 133-154.Straus, M. A. (1994). Beating the devil out of them:Corporal punishment in Americanfamilies and its ef-fect on children. Boston: Lexington.Straus,M. A., & Donnelly, D. A. (1993). Corporal pun-ishmentof adolescentsby Americanparents.Youthand Society, 24, 419-442.Straus,M. A., & Kaufman-Kantor,. (1994).Corporalpunishments y parentsof adolescents:A riskfactor

165


13/13

Journal of Marriage and the Familyin the epidemiology of depression, suicide, alcoholabuse, and wife beating. Adolescence, 29, 543-562.Sugarman, D. B., Straus, M. A., & Giles-Sims, J.(1994). Corporalpunishment yparentsand subse-quentanti-socialbehaviorof children.Paperpresent-ed at the annual meeting of the National Council onFamily Relations;Minneapolis, MN.Thoits, P. A. (1983). Dimensions of life events that in-fluence psychological distress: An evaluation andsynthesis of the literature.In H. B. Kaplan(Ed.), Psy-chosocial stress: Trends n theoryand research pp.33-103). New York: Academic.

Turner, H. A. (in press). Corporal punishment and thestress process. In M. Donnelly, & M. Straus (Eds.),Corporalpunishment f children n theoreticalper-spective. New Haven, CT: Yale.Weiss, B., Dodge, K. A., Bates, J. E., & Pettit, G. S.(1992). Some consequences of early harsh discipline:Child aggression and a maladaptive social informa-tion processing style. Child Development, 63, 1321-1335.

Share the 1994~~,,~~~ r r ?_ _ _ __,,...d.. .. NCFR Conference~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~... _Ko,.............._______

i.-. -:::,j,,,i,.......-'.............. w:t. h Y our StudentsO.EEj-it}.E-E.:..:..i-E ~~~~~~~~._t...........M......i-_EiE............Mi,,i ~~~~~~~~.......{.............

Natonal Council on Family Relatis,

R o s a c n of c ev'eio:: _ _National Council on Family Relations (NCFR) offers a collection of conference events on video cassette.94V1.ConstructingFutureforheNext GenerationfFathers,William.Doherty,Univ.ofMN-St. Paul94V2.TheFuture fMalesnFamilies:Multi-disciplinary erspectives,anel ndForum.William.Doherty, amesLevine,AlanHawkins,KayPasley,RalphLaRossaPLENARYPEECHES94V3.Historical erspectivesn Families ndJusticein DistressedCommunities,Jacqueline ones,BrandeisUniv.,Waltham,MA94V5.JusticeBetween pousesUponDivorce,CarolRogerson, niv.of TorontoLawSchool94V7.GrowingUpin a SociallyToxicEnvironment:Childhoodn the1990s, amesGarbarino,ornellUniv.

RESEARCHPDATESORPRACTITIONERS94V4.WorkingWithAdolescentsn Crisis,AnthonyJurich,KS State Univ.94V8. GenderDynamics n IntimateEnvironments:FeministInsights or Families, Connie Shehan,Univ ofFL, and MichaelJohnson, PennStateUniv.94V9.ChildSupportndFairness,udith eltzer,Univ.of WI - MadisonNCFR PRESIDENTALDDRESS94V10.American amilies:MovingTowardMulticulturalSociety,HarriettePipesMcAdoo, MIStateUniv.

94V6.Moccasins nd TennisShoes:Families,SocialJusticeand Native AmericanCulture,Panel:JackWeatherford,ebbyStark,DeniseWakefield,daAlden Ciona:CiF for:::aist of her: soI.. . , n, ..... . . .NationalCouncil on FamilyRelations3989Central ve.NE, 550-11 Minneapolis,MN55421NCFR Phone: 612)781-9331* FAX612)781-9348* E-mail:[email protected]

166

Corporal Punishment as a Stressor Among Youth

Documents

Transcript of Corporal Punishment as a Stressor Among Youth